Federal Trade Commission v. Skybiz.com, Inc.
United States District Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma
No. 01-CV-396 (2001)
- Written by Sheri Dennis, JD
Facts
Skybiz.com, Inc. (Skybiz) (defendant) operated a multi-level marketing (MLM) scheme that involved the sale of Web Pak, a computer-related package that contained tools and teaching videos for creating an internet website. Skybiz sold Web Pak to consumers known as Associates. Associates then earned commission from Skybiz by recruiting and selling Web Pak to new Associates, who in turn earned commission by recruiting and selling the product to other Associates. Through this process, Associates were able to earn commission not only from their own sales, but also from the sales of their recruited Associates and any Associates recruited by those Associates. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (plaintiff) sued Skybiz for violating section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act (FTCA), 15 U.S.C. § 45. Specifically, the FTC alleged that Skybiz had made false and misleading statements, provided others with the means to make deceptive claims, failed to disclose to consumer-Associates that they likely would not achieve the benefits promised, and operated a pyramid scheme in violation of the FTCA. After issuing an order to show cause why a preliminary injunction against Skybiz should not be granted, the district court rendered findings of fact and conclusions of law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Kern, C.J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 807,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.